2010 WSOP, Day 40: A Few Calculations

Yesterday I spent my day off largely away from the Rio. I was there early on for a little business, right about the time the doors were opened and the crush of players and spectators were first allowed into the Amazon Room. Had thoughts of sticking around but I soon realized that after a week straight of working and sleeping 3-4 hours a night I was much too fatigued to do so. It was a day off, and I needed to be somewhere else.

Ended up spending the afternoon back at the home away from home following some of the coverage online, sort of watching a repeat of the Netherlands-Uruguay match, then falling unconscious for a surprising number of hours, starting around dinner time and lasting through mid-morning today.

I guess my body had done a few calculations, decided I had fallen way short of the needed hours of sleep over the past weeks, and finally took over.

The big story yesterday -- as it seemed to me during my waking hours -- was the fact that 1,489 players came out on Day 1b, a bump up from the 1,125 who played on Monday’s Day 1a. Many wanted to compare yesterday’s number to the 873 who played Day 1b last year, but of course that was the Fourth of July which surely affected the low turnout then.

Indications are that Day 1c will also see a large turnout -- i.e., something in that same 1,500-player range, at least, and perhaps a lot more -- and everyone still expects a massive group on Thursday for Day 1d. People continue to try to guess at a total number of entrants for the Main Event, and I’m hearing a lot predicting a total just above or below 7,000, which sounds like a fair estimate to me.

F-Train has been posting off and on this summer about the turnouts at the WSOP and how they’ve been comparing to last year. His first couple of posts on the subject (here and here) noted how numbers were down, but a later one from about halfway through the Series suggested things were turning around.

A couple of days ago we received a presser from the WSOP noting that the overall number of entrants for the 2010 WSOP had already exceeded last year’s total after 55 events, with 63,706 registrations total. There were 1,942 more who played Event No. 56 ($2,500 No-Limit Hold’em), so that’s 65,648 heading into the Main Event, meaning this year’s ultimate total will surely exceed 70,000 -- a significant increase, for sure.

Of course, it should be noted also that this year there were eight different $1,000 buy-in events (including the Ladies & Seniors), as opposed to just three in 2009. Those eight events alone attracted 24,946 entrants, nearly 38% of the total through the first 56 events. That said, the total prize money awarded in 2010 will probably be more than in 2009. Last year saw a total of $174,013,215 awarded, while this year the figure will probably end up right around the $180 million mark.

What’s it all mean? Well, for both the Main Event and the WSOP as a whole, I think the main story as far as numbers are concerned is that they’ve essentially held steady from last year. One could probably dive in deeper and discover other mini-trends or anomalies worth examining, but big picture-wise, we’re not really seeing a huge gain or loss at this year’s WSOP.

There was another storyline I found sort of intriguing from following the coverage yesterday -- actually more so from following my Twitter feed which includes a few of the players who happened to be playing Day 1b. I’m thinking in particular of Annette Obrestad’s tweets documenting her struggles yesterday.

Here’s a quick sample:

@Annette_15: Not a great start

@Annette_15: Back from break. 10k. Lots of small pots gone wrong

@Annette_15: 100-200. Cant believe im this short already

@Annette_15: 25k. Why do ppl hate flops so much? Makes me rly sad. 3 betting shouldn’t b allowed lol

@Annette_15: This table is fkn crazy and theyre all randoms except for one guy whos by online definition old and hes crushing

@Annette_15: Man theyre rly making it hard for me in my first main event…. Where r all these so called donkeys i keep hearing so much about???

Obrestad’s phone would eventually run out of juice, just before she ran out of chips, in fact, and so it would be some hours later before she’d report “Oh I busted btw.”

A lot of players use Twitter to report their progress in tourneys, and a great many sometimes will use it as a means to “vent” a little or at least remark on the reasons why they might be struggling. I’ve singled out Obrestad’s messages here, but I’ve gotten the sense over the last couple of days -- and really over the course of the entire Series -- that a lot of pros and top-level players who’ve had much success in the past have had experiences very similar to Obrestad’s this time around.

In other words, having expected to encounter fields full of predictable and/or passive players, they’ve been met with more and more difficult opponents (i.e., players who know not to limp, who do not continually give up on small pots, etc.). Tom Schneider was kind of getting at this, too, in some of his comments to me a few days ago, though he additionally observed that the poor economy has probably contributed to this toughening up of the player pool, too.

It’s a bit of a hasty generalization, perhaps, but it does seem like while the numbers are holding steady, the percentage of truly weak players (“dead money”) has declined, perhaps markedly. A lot more “thinkers” around the table -- that is, calculating players capable of moves and of successfully countering others’.

One other trend I was seeing on Twitter over the last couple of days was how some were referring to the play as being “boring” to watch. There could be a lot of reasons for why this was the case, but I wonder if one of the factors causing the play to be less than scintillating to observers was that there were more skilled players competing? The fact is, when one can’t see the players’ hole cards, good, solid poker can be a bit tedious to watch and report on (especially if one doesn’t have back stories or other information about the players to help contextualize what one is seeing).

I’m off again today, but will be back in the thick of it tomorrow for Day 1d. Last year saw 2,809 show up for that last of the Day Ones, with hundreds more reportedly being shut out. I think I saw somewhere that they are ready to accommodate as many as 3,700 players this time around -- one hopes they’ve calculated properly this time!

2010 WSOP, Day 27: Boom Boom (Out Go the Lights)

Was reporting on the last day of Event No. 39, the $1,500 No-Limit Hold’em Shootout yesterday. Actually the event had turned into something other than a “shootout” since 14 players had made it through the first two rounds, so we were basically looking at a 14-person sit-n-go, eventually won by Steven Kelly around 2 a.m. this morning.

Event No. 39 was attracting a bit of attention during the first part of the day yesterday since both J.C. Tran and Annette Obrestad were part of the final day field. But both went out early -- boom, boom -- shy of the final table, and thus a lot of the potential drama for the event was eliminated with them.

Tran ran into some hard luck during the first couple of levels and went out in 13th. Meanwhile, Obrestad had the chip lead briefly early on, but doubled up a short stack twice in short succession, thereby becoming a short stack herself.

Then came a hand in which Derric Haynie opened from the button, Obrestad reraised all in from the small blind, then Michael Pesek reshoved from the big blind. Haynie thought a bit, then called (having both covered), turning over pocket tens. Pesek had , and Obrestad was in a tough spot with . “Sevens!” was the yell from the rail, but none came and Haynie scored a double-knockout when his tens held.

We then scurried over to the main stage, where the remaining nine were quickly in their seats and awaiting a restart. As I got over there and began to set up, I heard the players laughing about something one of them had said a little while earlier. Soon I realized they were referring to a post I had written in which I’d reported some humorous table talk.

Michael Cooper, who ultimately finished eighth, had said something funny after surviving an all-in situation versus Dustin Dirksen, and I think Dirksen had read the post on his iPhone and shared it with the table. Here’s that post, if you are curious.

Last summer I wrote more than once about the whole Twitter-texting phenomenon in a post called “Land of a 1000 Reporters.” There I was remarking on how others -- namely the players themselves -- were also “reporting” on the event. Of course, once a tournament reaches the money players are made to put away those electronic devices, although they can pull them out during breaks and write or read to their heart’s content.

This was something a little different, though -- players reading and responding to what I had reported. Kind of uncanny, actually, to have the players on whom one is reporting almost immediately aware of what one writes about them. A little later in the evening we had a couple of final table spectators -- including the Hinkle brothers (Grant and Blair) -- let us know they were reading our reports, too.

Last summer I concluded that I didn’t mind all the Tweeting so much, regarding it more as a complement to the coverage we were trying to provide rather than competition. Feel the same way this year about it, and I also don’t mind so much that the players are themselves following the coverage as the tourney goes.

It is a little weird to think about, though. Compare any other sporting event and try to imagine those competing also directly interacting with the reporting on their event as it goes.

Our tourney eventually ended about 2 a.m., and as we were putting up the last post of the night the power unexpectedly went out in the Amazon Room. We heard it went out all over the Rio, and perhaps elsewhere on the strip, although those reports could have been exaggerated, I think.

Was a weird scene, having been suddenly plunged into total darkness. Not to mention a brief moment of total silence as the hum of all the machines had abruptly stopped. The quiet didn’t last long, however, as a loud roar soon went up, with someone loudly pleading “Cover your chips!” over the top.

About 15 seconds later some lights had come back on, and within about five minutes order seemed mostly restored, although for the tourneys still going they had to go on an unscheduled break to set things completely aright. That picture to the left is of WSOP Media Director Nolan Dalla and Bluff Magazine’s Jessica Welman with our event’s winner, Kelly, just after the brief blackout. Their interviewing of Kelly had been interrupted momentarily, and there they are trying to get back on track.

Luckily for us, we were done already so I got back to the hotel in time to spend one last night with Vera before taking her to the airport this morning. Tough stuff, this being apart, and as I mentioned last week this will probably be the last summer I spend entirely out here in Vegas. More likely in the future I look for a way just to come for a couple of weeks, perhaps for the Main Event only.

No time off for your humble gumshoe, as I’m back in the Rio again today to help with another event, Event No. 44, the $2,500 Mixed Limit/No-Limit Hold’em event. Join the players and people on the rail and follow the coverage yourselves over at PokerNews.

2010 WSOP, Day 26: Observing Obrestad

The last three days have been a bit disjointed for me. Have been trying to spend some quality time with Vera, although unfortunately I’ve had to work and so that’s been a bit of a challenge. But we’ve still managed to have some fun during the hours I’m not at the Rio.

When I have been at the Rio, I’ve been covering different events each of the last three days -- the $10,000 Heads Up No-Limit Hold’em Championship on Sunday (Event No. 35), the $2,500 Pot-Limit Hold’em-Pot-Limit Omaha on Monday (Event No. 38), and the $1,500 No-Limit Hold’em Shootout yesterday (Event No. 39) -- which adds to the disjointed feeling. But I’m back on the final day of the Shootout today, which I’m looking forward to, as Annette Obrestad won her second straight table and will be there to play in the final.

Incidentally, the Shootout ended up attracting 1,397 players who played 140 (mostly) ten-handed tables the first day, then 14 ten-handed tables yesterday. Those 14 return today to play what is essentially a two-table sit-n-go in which each will start with the same starting stack (450,000 chips). Kind of messes up the Shootout format a little -- plus the payouts got a little screwy, too. But that’s how it is.

It took Obrestad until about 1 a.m. or so yesterday to win her table, so she was one of the last to move on to the final. As a result, I got the chance to watch her play a little more than I have thus far this summer.

I first saw Obrestad in an WSOP event a couple of weeks ago. It was just after I’d returned to Vegas from Peru, and I had gone in to help out on Event No. 17, the $5,000 No-Limit Hold’em event that had attracted most of the big names. I wasn’t scheduled to work that day, but had gone in primarily just to reacquaint myself with the site and some of its features, since during the days I had worked before I’d left things hadn’t been functioning so smoothly.

Eventually I’d end up taking over for a colleague who wasn’t feeling well, and so it turned into a regular day of live blogging. Before that, however, I was in a more passive mode, helping with entering chip counts or whatever else was needed, and not really going out onto the floor much to see what was going on.

Anyhow, it was during that earlier part of the day I did take a tour around to see the field, and I remember being a little startled to see Obrestad, standing out most consipicously from the other players at her table. I don’t believe she had played in many (or perhaps any) events prior to that one, as she had had some obligations that had prevented her joining the Series at its start.

I’ve long gotten past feeling at all starstruck around poker “celebrities.” I know during the first days of the WSOP a couple of years ago, there were a few moments here and there where I was marveling a little at seeing folks like Brunson, Hellmuth, or Ivey in such close proximity, but that went away pretty quickly.

For example, just a few days ago I was covering the $10,000 Heads Up No-Limit Hold’em Championship, and was there to catch Tom Dwan’s bustout hand in Round 2. He and his opponent, Andrew Rosskamm, were one of the last matches to finish in that round, and so all of the surrounding tables were empty. It was just the dealer, Dwan, Rosskamm, and Erik Seidel, sitting at the other end of the table watching the match. And me, a few feet to the side, noting the action.

I recall thinking (fleetingly) then that some might find this an interesting spot in which to be. And it was -- Dwan is a pretty compelling figure to watch play. But then again, it was also just another hand. Like all those whom we see on television or who seem somehow “larger than life” to us, they’re just folks like you and me, and it perhaps becomes easier to appreciate that when dealing with them in person.

That said, I’ll admit to having that same sort of silly “OMG” feeling when first spotting Obrestad in that $5K event. It is really her? The one whom we’ve read and seen and heard so much about? I remember Dr. Pauly wrote something around that time about how seeing her play at her first WSOP like this was “like [seeing] a young Miles Davis perform at clubs in NYC in the early 1950s.” I knew what he meant. Something special going on here, I couldn’t help thinking. I should really pay attention.

In terms of her appearance and dress, Obrestad obviously stood out last night as one of the few women in the room, although watching her one soon gets the sense that she very much belongs. That is to say, of all 140 players I saw yesterday around the tables, she looked as comfortable (or more so) as anyone in the room.

She wore her familiar wrap-around shades, and had on a long-sleeved sweater to help combat the air-conditioned chill of the Amazon. Obrestad generally sits very still, her arms resting on the edge of the table, hands stopping the cards as they are pitched her way. She had the sleeves of her sweater pulled forward over her hands so that only her fingers, with painted nails, were exposed. When the action reached her she would carefully check her cards, then more often than not slowly pull a few chips off the top of her stack and toss them forward, following a similar motion each time.

Not unlike Dwan, actually, was Obrestad in the conservation of movement. That said, she was no robot at the table, and often between hands would chat with the other players -- about hands, but also about other things, too. Vera was there last night for a little while and watched Obrestad from the rail, and she noted how sometimes Obrestad would let out an infectious giggle that reminded one she was indeed still young.

But poker-wise, she’s seems anything but youthful. My sense was she was never seriously threatened in her match yesterday, although she did need a double-up late to survive. Perhaps it is her demeanor and successful hiding of tells that is affecting my impression of her, but it never seemed to me like she was unsure about what to do next (something I can’t always say of all players I watch play).

Like I say, I’m definitely looking forward to seeing how Obrestad does in today’s final. J.C. Tran also made it through. I had the chance to cover Tran when he won his first WSOP bracelet two years ago, and he’s another one I find fairly fascinating to watch. Would definitely make things interesting if those two made it to the final nine today and perhaps further.

You can’t watch, too, unfortunately. But you can follow our reports of what we see over at PokerNews starting a little later today.

Here’s the SCOOP (PokerStars Spring Championship of Online Poker)

Looks like the Full Tilt Online Poker Series XVI is wrapping up today with their Main Event, for which they’ve brought in their newest red pro, Annette “Annette_15” Obrestad to host. And as one big online series concludes, another gets underway -- the 2010 Spring Championship of Online Poker over on PokerStars. No shortage of opportunities for the online tourney crowd these days.

I have to admit that when it comes to FTOPS, I get a little less excited simply because it seems the series is always either ongoing or just around the corner. Indeed, FTOPS XV just concluded back in February, and I think that MiniFTOPS generally runs just after the regular series, so there really is something happening with FTOPS pretty much all the time. Meanwhile, over on PokerStars the SCOOP is a once-a-year affair, as is the World Championship of Online Poker (WCOOP) that tends to come around each September.

This is the second year for SCOOP, while the WCOOP has been around since 2002. My understanding is that the SCOOP originated in part thanks to the massive popularity and growth of WCOOP. The latter began as a summer event, then moved into the early fall (around the time the WSOP moved its schedule from the spring to the summer).

Was looking at the crazy numbers for the WCOOP over the eight years it has run. Check ‘em out:

2002: 9 events, $799,050 total prize pool
2003: 11, $2,716,200
2004: 12, $6,002,300
2005: 15, $12,783,900
2006: 18, $18,674,300
2007: 23, $24,218,600
2008: 33, $39,958,000
2009: 45, $51,652,800

Last year was the first for SCOOP, which is also sometimes called the “Spring Championship of Online Poker - All Stakes.” The idea was to do something to make SCOOP distinct from the WCOOP, and so a schedule was created that included a wide range of buy-ins -- from as little as $5.50 (a rebuy tourney) or $11 on up to the $10,300 Main Event and the $25,500 NLHE Heads-Up event.

Last year there were 22 events, each with a “low,” “medium,” and “high” buy-in, meaning 66 tournaments in all. The total prize pool for all 66 added up to $38,324,830.

This year PokerStars has nearly doubled the schedule, with 38 events (again each with “low,” “medium,” and “high” buy-ins), meaning 114 SCOOP bracelets are up for grabs. The guaranteed prize pool is $45,000,000, although if last year is any indication, the prize pool will likely exceed that. (Last year SCOOP sported a $30 million guarantee for the total prize pool.) It is possible, I suppose, that the prize pool may ultimately eclipse that $51,652,800 from the 2009 WCOOP, the biggest ever for an online tourney series.

Today things kick off with two events (six tourneys) -- the No-Limit Hold’em 6-max. & the start of a two-day No-Limit Hold’em event. Here’s the full schedule (all times are Eastern):

Sunday, May 2, 13:00
Event No. 1: No-Limit Hold’em (6-max.)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 2, 17:00
Event No. 2: No-Limit Hold’em (2-day event)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 3, 14:00
Event No. 3: No-Limit Hold’em (6-max., rebuys)
Low -- $5.50 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $55 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $530 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 3, 17:00
Event No. 4: Badugi
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 3, 20:00
Event No. 5: Pot-limit Omaha (turbo, 1 rebuy/1 add-on)
Low -- $11 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 4, 14:00
Event No. 6: Pot-Limit Five-Card Draw
Low -- $11 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 4, 17:00
Event No. 7: No-Limit Hold’em, Heads-Up Match Play
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 4, 20:00
Event No. 8: No-Limit Hold’em
Low -- $11 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 5, 14:00
Event No. 9: Mixed Hold’em (6-max.)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $400,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 5, 17:00
Event No. 10: Seven-Card Stud
Low -- $33 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $320 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $3,150 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 6, 14:00
Event No. 11: Pot-Limit Omaha, Heads-Up Match Play
Low -- $22 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 6, 17:00
Event No. 12: No-Limit Hold’em (w/knockout bounties)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 7, 14:00
Event No. 13: No-Limit Hold’em, Ante Up! (antes, no blinds)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 7, 17:00
Event No. 14: Limit Omaha/8
Low -- $55 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $530 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $5,200 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 7, 20:00
Event No. 15: No-Limit Hold’em, 2X Chance (turbo, one rebuy if bust in first hr., no add-on)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 8, 14:00
Event No. 16: No-Limit Hold’em Shootout (10-max.)
Low -- $22 buy-in (quadruple shootout, i.e., max. 10,000 players), $150,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in (triple shootout, i.e., max. 1,000 players), $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in (double shootout, i.e., max. 100 players), $200,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 8, 17:00
Event No. 17: Pot-limit Omaha (6-max., rebuys)
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 8, 20:00
Event No. 18: Limit Hold’em (turbo)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 9, 13:00
Event No. 19: No-Limit Hold’em (big antes)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 9, 17:00
Event No. 20: No-Limit Hold’em (2-day event)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $2,000,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 10, 14:00
Event No. 21: Pot-Limit Hold’em/Pot-Limit Omaha
Low -- $16.50 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $162 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,575 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 10, 17:00
Event No. 22: No-Limit Hold’em (4-max.)
Low -- $33 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $320 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed
High -- $3,150 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Monday, May 10, 20:00
Event No. 23: No-Limit Hold’em (turbo, rebuys)
Low -- $11 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 11, 14:00
Event No. 24: Triple Draw Deuce-to-Seven
Low -- $11 buy-in, $25,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 11, 17:00
Event No. 25: Seven-Card Stud/8
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Tuesday, May 11, 20:00
Event No. 26: No-Limit Hold’em
Low -- $11 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 12, 14:00
Event No. 27: Razz
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Wednesday, May 12, 17:00
Event No. 28: No-Limit Hold’em (rebuys)
Low -- $11 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $400,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $600,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 13, 14:00
Event No. 29: 8-Game Mix
Low -- $33 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $320 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $3,150 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed

Thursday, May 13, 17:00
Event No. 30: Pot-Limit Omaha/8
Low -- $11 buy-in, $75,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $109 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed
High -- $1,050 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 14, 14:00
Event No. 31: No-Limit Hold’em (one rebuy, one add-on)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 14, 17:00
Event No. 32: Limit Hold’em (6-max.)
Low -- $55 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $530 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
High -- $5,200 buy-in, $300,000 guaranteed

Friday, May 14, 20:00
Event No. 33: No-Limit Omaha/8 (turbo)
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 15, 14:00
Event No. 34: Pot-Limit Omaha (6-max.)
Low -- $55 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $530 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
High -- $5,200 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 15, 15:30
Event No. 35: No-Limit Hold’em, Heads-Up Match Play (2-day event)
Low -- $270 buy-in, $250,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $2,600 buy-in, $500,000 guaranteed
High -- $25,500 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Saturday, May 15, 17:00
Event No. 36: H.O.R.S.E.
Low -- $22 buy-in, $50,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $100,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $150,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 16, 13:00
Event No. 37: No-Limit Hold’em
Low -- $22 buy-in, $200,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $215 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed
High -- $2,100 buy-in, $750,000 guaranteed

Sunday, May 16, 17:00
Event No. 38: No-Limit Hold’em Main Event (2-day event)
Low -- $109 buy-in, $1,000,000 guaranteed
Medium -- $1,050 buy-in, $3,000,000 guaranteed
High -- $10,300 buy-in, $5,000,000 guaranteed, $1,000,000 guarantee to winner

I’ve somehow managed to score a couple of tickets to low buy-in events, and so will be participating some. I’ll also be helping cover the sucker over on the PokerStars blog, where a group of folks will be writing up reports of every one of the 114 events.

Gonna be a lot of late nights here over the next couple of weeks for your humble gumshoe, though I have to say I’m looking forward both to the writing and the playing. Kind of a tune up, I suppose, for us reporters, too, as we start thinking about heading to Vegas at month’s end for the WSOP.

Check out that PokerStars blog for them reports.

NBC’s Evening Line-Up & “Poker After Dark”

Had some extra time last week and so ended up filling some of it watching “Poker After Dark” here on the computer. The show has been around almost exactly three years now, although last week marked the debut of what they are calling season six.

The theme for the week was “Commentators III,” meaning the six participants in the winner-take-all sit-n-go were all people who have hosted poker shows at some point -- Howard Lederer, Gabe Kaplan, Joe Sebok, Ali Nejad, Mark Gregorich, and Kara Scott. I’d seen a few comments here and there about the first episode, and so that got me over onto the NBC poker page where I ended up following the match throughout the week.

I won’t go into particulars of how things went or who won, in case you have the sucker on TiVo or something and plan to watch yourself. I realized as I was watching I hadn’t really seen an entire week’s worth of “PAD” for a while. The show was somewhat entertaining, I suppose. Have to admit, though, I found my attention drifting more than once.

The poker was mostly tight, with really only one or two hands during the entire week demonstrating a player making what might be called a “move.” Thus did the outcome primarily rest on who caught cards in the most timely fashion. The banter was at times interesting, although I found it a little headachy trying to hear everyone. Seems like if the table talk is meant to be a focus of the show, they’d highlight what folks were saying more aggressively by keeping the talkers on camera and maybe turning up their mics now and then. (Then again, maybe there was just more mumbling going on last week than normally occurs on the show.)

I am nevertheless interested to see the show again this week, primarily to check out the debut of Annette Obrestad. Gonna be a big year for Obrestad, who turned 21 last September. They are calling this week “Nicknames” week, although strangely on the NBC site they are not referring to Obrestad by her best-known nickname -- “Annette_15” -- instead referring to her as “The Huntress.” Actually, I’m pretty sure that decision was quite consciously made so as to avoid any need to explain what “Annette_15” actually means.

As I say, I watched the show last week on the NBC website, as I don’t normally stay up late enough to watch “PAD” when it airs on my local TV station at 2:05 a.m. Probably the last time I was watching the show at that time of night was last summer when I was in Vegas helping cover the WSOP and getting back to my room around then after a long day-slash-night at the Rio.

You probably heard all of that news yesterday about NBC’s late night line-up being in serious doubt here following the 2010 Winter Olympics which will be taking over the network for most of February. “The Jay Leno Show,” which currently airs nightly at 10 p.m., has apparently been losing viewers at a rapid clip, with many affiliates saying they’ll drop it because of the way it has been negatively affecting ratings for the local 11 p.m. news. So NBC announced yesterday they’ll take Leno out of the prime time line-up once the Olympics are over, meaning their post-local news schedule is a bit up in the air.

It sounds like NBC wants to put Leno on at 11:35 p.m. for a half-hour, bump Conan O’Brien’s “The Tonight Show” to 12:05 a.m., then move “Late Night with Jimmy Fallon” to 1:05 a.m. Apparently Carson Daly’s half-hour show “Last Call,” currently at 1:35 a.m., will get dropped altogether if this turns out to be the new arrangement. Other possibilities being reported are that O’Brien could skedaddle, taking his show over to the Fox Network. In any event, the whole thing sounds like a major headache for NBC, compounded by significant regret over the whole Leno prime time experiment.

So the question for poker fans -- especially those of us who don’t bother much with all these late night talk shows -- is what might all this have to do with “Poker After Dark”? Even if I wasn’t riveted by last week’s episodes, I’d still very much like to see the show stay on NBC. Will this shake-up on NBC between 10 p.m. and 2 a.m. affect “PAD”?

I kind of doubt it. That isn’t to say the show is altogether safe. But I’m not really seeing these moves as directly affecting the show’s fate all that much.

For one, while ratings for “PAD” aren’t without meaning, they aren’t nearly as important as they would be without Full Tilt Poker’s sponsorship. Indeed, my understanding is the show wouldn’t exist without FTP supporting it. Recall how about year ago PokerStars decided no longer to send its pros onto the show? (Daniel Negreanu wrote about it on his blog.)

In other words, the show really operates more like an infomercial than a regular, ratings-driven show. It’s not like the show needs to remain popular enough to attract advertisers to keep it on the air, although obviously if it were to tank too badly Full Tilt would no longer view it as a worthwhile vehicle to advertise their product. So, how well “PAD” is doing ratings-wise compared, say, to Carson Daly’s show isn’t necessarily a huge factor here, I don’t believe.

One other point that seems relevant here: the articles I read yesterday suggested that NBC hasn’t any say over what its affiliates show after 2 a.m. As I mentioned, most were reporting that if the Leno-O’Brien-Fallon shuffle into the night indeed happens, Carson Daly’s show will be axed -- that is, it will not moved to 2:05 a.m. At least that’s how NBC network chairman Jeff Gaspin is characterizing that possible scenario. (EDIT [added 5:45 p.m.]: Actually, it sounds like Conan O’Brien is having none of this proposed shufflin' around, according to the statement he released today -- addressed to “People of Earth.”)

All of which seems to indicate that if local affiliates are presently content to keep “PAD” on at 2:05 a.m., there doesn’t seem much reason yet to think they won’t continue to keep the show moving forward. I suppose if they were presented an option to show that Daly show at that time, that could threaten the future of “PAD,” but it doesn’t appear that’s going to happen.

Gonna be a busier week for me this time around. But like I say I want to find time in here somewhere to watch Obrestad take on the other “nicknames” on this week’s show -- Mike “The Mouth” Matusow, Antonio “The Magician” Esfandiari, Erick “E-Dog” Lindgren, Phil “The Unabomber” Laak, and Phil “The Poker Brat” Hellmuth.

Yeah, I know what you’re thinking -- no Chainsaw?!

2008 WSOP, Day 21: Tigers & Grizzlies

Was fairly smooth sailing yesterday back in the Brasilia room for Day 2 of Event No. 34, the $1,500 Pot-Limit Omaha w/rebuys event. Ended up being about a ten-hour day at the office -- not bad at all. Some of the guys on ours had a prop bet going with the ones covering the Stud event (Event No. 35) regarding who would finish first, a bet our guys won by about an hour-and-a-half.

Today’s final table is scheduled for the main stage (and will be broadcast over ESPN360). Two name pros made it -- Layne Flack and Ted Forrest. Forrest is the one I’d look out for, although among the others current chip leader Kyle Kloeckner and Michael Guzzardi look tough, as does Dario Alioto who took down the PLO event at the WSOPE last fall.

Tim “Tmay420” West is also there. This is his second final table this summer, and I also covered his other one (the $5,000 No-Limit Hold’em shootout). He’s the short stack going in today, but I’m hoping he gets some chips together and makes a run. West is a super friendly guy and a hell of a player to boot.

Had a few interesting, extracurricular moments yesterday while covering the event. Annette “Annette_15” Obrestad stopped by for a visit. My partner, Marc, has worked with Betfair in the past, and so Obrestad came in to say hello to him. She seemed a little bummed at not being able to play -- she is still only 19 years old, and in fact won’t be able to play until the 2010 WSOP as her birthday is in September. There was talk of her getting in on some cash games, though that can’t possibly happen either unless they are side games. Seemed like a friendly, smart person, and I can imagine how the contrast of her sweet image and terrorizing style of play can give her opponents fits.

Layne Flack was bouncing off the walls, pumped up on All In energy drinks and/or his natural hyperactive tendencies. He frequently came over to our station to chat, usually when Tiffany Michelle and Amanda Leatherman were sitting nearby. Flack once scampered over to engage them in a debate over who had the sexiest name. I joked about putting that into the blog, but refrained.

We did include some of the players’ banter in the blog, including a couple of posts about a several-hour-long debate the players were having about the relative difficulty of killing a tiger versus a grizzly bear. Here is the first one:

Pick Your Battles
Play is tightening up even more as we near the cash bubble. As players pass small stacks of chips back and forth, the table talk is increasing.

Just passed Table No. 63, where the following was overheard: “I'd rather fight a tiger with a knife than a grizzly with a gun.”

Not sure of context, but it sounds like the subject of choosing one's battles carefully is on everyone's mind with just four to go before the money.

Then, a good six hours later:

Beasts of Prey
The discussion about weapons of choice when trying to kill tigers and/or grizzly bears, begun earlier this afternoon, has lingered on into the night.

“I mean, think about this,” said Ted Forrest to Nathan Hagens, wishing to draw a distinction. “The Siegfried and Roy show... They carry a 300-lb. tiger on their back. You're not gonna carry a grizzly bear on your back....”

“No fun the first time I did it!” yelled Layne Flack from the other table.

Bill Chen was in this event, having been knocked out on Day 1. He was there sweating his co-author Jerrod Ankenman, who ended up cashing yesterday, when he came over to our table and asked if he could set up his laptop next to us. Of course, we said. Chen proceeded to log on and play a PokerStars freeroll, something he’s obligated to do from time to time as a PS-sponsored pro.

Terrence Chan was nearby and he and Chen occasionally discussed his progress in the freeroll, laughing and clearly having a good time. I’ve read a good deal of Mathematics of Poker, so it was definitely amusing to see the scholarly Chen joking around in defiance of the professorial persona one might assume from the book. One player who cashed brought a copy of the book for Chen to sign, which he did and then got Ankenman -- still alive in the tourney at the time -- to sign as well.

Should be an interesting final table today. Am hoping afterwards or perhaps tomorrow (my day off) to connect with the Beyond the Table guys, as all three -- Karridy, Dan, and Tom Schneider -- are in Vegas at the moment. Of course, Tom is busy cashing in event after event (he’s made the money five times already). Have a feeling I’ll be seeing the Donkey Bomber at the next event I cover, the Deuce-to-Seven Triple Lowball (Limit) event.

As always, head over to PokerNews to follow it all.

WSOPE Will Take Place Before WSOP Is Over

Noticed the World Series of Poker had recently settled on dates for the 2008 WSOP-Europe events -- September 19th through October 1st. No word as yet on what events will take place, though I assume we’ll be seeing something similar to what happened last year when there were three events, including the £10,000 “Main Event” Annette Obrestad took down.

You’ll recall all of the buzz last fall about whether or not the WSOPE events should be considered “real” bracelet events, particularly after Obrestad’s victory (the day before she turned 19) made her the youngest WSOP bracelet winner ever. There are lot more meaningful debates to be had, of course, but this year’s delayed Main Event final table may well have an effect on how the WSOPE is viewed, for a couple of reasons.

For one, the WSOP Main Event (Event No. 54 of 55) will not have finished by the time the WSOPE events are played. If WSOP officials were to number those London events as Nos. 56, 57, and 58 -- a relatively meaningless, mostly ornamental change -- doing so could actually make those events seem more integrated into the primary WSOP schedule and thus more like “legitimate” bracelet events.

Secondly, it would seem likely that one or more of those who make this year’s WSOP Main Event final table will be playing in those WSOPE events. In fact, I would think WSOP officials would like it very much if all nine were there so as to direct more attention what will be happening in London this fall.

Last year the WSOPE events attracted a few big name American pros, but the fields mostly consisted of non-Americans (particularly Europeans). However, last year also saw record numbers of non-Americans trek to Vegas for the WSOP. Ten non-Americans won bracelets at last year’s WSOP, and the WSOP Main Event final table featured five non-Americans -- Jon Kalmar (U.K.), Philip Hilm (U.K., orig. Denmark), Tuan Lam (Canada, orig. Vietnam), Alex Kravchenko (Russia), and Raymond Rahme (South Africa). Also, champ Jerry Yang, a U.S. citizen, was born in Laos, meaning only three of the players making the ME final table were born in the States. All of which helped underscore what WSOP Commissioner Jeffrey Pollack was saying back when the first WSOPE was announced: “We are trying to put more ‘World’ into the World Series of Poker.”

Seems very possible that this year’s ME final table will also have an international flavor. And if a number of Europeans make it, I would certainly expect to see all of them playing in the WSOPE. In any event, what each of the “November Nine” decide to do with regard to the WSOPE will certainly be one of the major storylines come September.

In the Fishbowl

Was kicking around the PLO tables on Stars yesterday afternoon and decided to watch a couple of the Sunday tourneys while I played. Spotted a short-stacked Annette “Annette_15” Obrestad bust out of the $200+$15 Sunday Warm Up. Moved over to the $100+$9 w/rebuys tourney and noticed a few familiar names up and down the leaderboard, including Jon “PearlJammer” Turner, Shane “Shaniac” Schleger, and Tim “Tmay420” West. Ended up spending a little bit of time railing a table featuring not one but two well-known online phenoms, Cliff “JohnnyBax” Josephy and Kevin “BeL0WaB0Ve” Saul. While there I witnessed a semi-interesting situation come up involving the two of them I thought I’d share.

This was not quite a couple of hours into the tourney – Level 8 (200/400 blinds with a 25-chip ante). Saul was actually the chip leader at the time with over 46,000 in chips. Meanwhile, Josephy had recently lost a chunk of his stack after missing a nut flush draw and found himself down to a lowly 4,145 in chips, putting him near the bottom of the 250 or so players remaining. Folded to Saul who from middle position put in a raise to 1,100. Another player folded, then Josephy raised all-in, pushing his remaining 4,120 into the middle.

It folded back around to Saul who took a few extra seconds deciding what to do. At the time, the pot was a little over 6,000, and it would take just about 3,000 for him to make the call -- about 2-to-1. As an untutored observer watching from afar, I couldn’t imagine Saul folding in this situation unless he had utter trash. And since he’d raised, it seemed as if he at least had something. But what do I know . . . .

Finally he made the call, and the cards were turned over. Josephy had a pair of kings, while Saul had . Both players sarcastically typed “RACE!” as the cards came out. A king flopped, and Josephy managed to survive. “NICE SUCKOUT BAD,” wryly typed Saul. (I think he meant either “Bax” or “bud.”) Josephy quickly responded with a “tyty.”

During the next hand, Saul typed “id love to fold there...” Then, “but everyone screams chipdump if i do.” He added a little frowny face.

He’s right, of course. That thought had crossed my mind as I watched. As Saul hesitated before making the call, I thought about how these guys all know one another, and might very well soft play in situations just like this one. (The fact that Saul and Josephy work together at PokerXFactor perhaps encourages such suspicions even further, for those who can’t help indulgin’ in them.) Completely unfair, of course, for me to think that way, although in today’s collusion-clouded climate, such thoughts are understandably hard to avoid.

While Saul certainly shouldn’t feel obligated to make an incorrect and/or marginal play in a spot like that just to stave off unfounded charges of complicity, I have to say I do appreciate seeing some of these guys showing an awareness of such matters. Would definitely be unfair should anything like that be happening, and I imagine a few of those who were sitting around the pair’s table probably appreciated Saul’s post-hand disclaimer.

Kind of makes missteps such as the one made by Jonathan Little last week even harder to comprehend. Once you experience some success -- online or live -- yr in the fishbowl, whether you like it or not. And people be watchin’.